| |
Bamu®
Account closed
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 1332 |
HVSC update?
@steppe
Shrug, no HVSC update this year? :_( |
|
... 40 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Luca
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 178 |
On the other hand, I heard that HVSC team has to perform a drastic HVSC directory change. Steppe, could you please mention a bit of this one, before update.exe would run on our peecees? |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
This year was a bit odd:
The routine of releasing updates regularly was crossed by our 10 Years HVSC collection, which took a significant amount of time to coordinate. We delayed the update, because we wanted to have the tunes of 10 Years inside. 10 Years HVSC got delayed itself, so the update got delayed again.
In addition, we're heading for a major directory structure change this update which needed quite some discussion time and finetuning adjustments until we found a clean and futureproof solution.
Then we decided to wait another few days for the Sidcompo 6 tunes and the end of the voting phase, but that didn't finish in time either...
So the weeks went by, what once was planned for early October is now finally due to be released in about a week. Shame on us for slaughtering the holy cow called "christmas update"! ;-)
And also: What Peter said, it's less timeconsuming to release one big update than to release three small ones. |
| |
j0x
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 215 |
We're working on it. Personally, I have an ascii file of 14 kb of comments for the latest beta (update #46, beta 6) after going through about half of it. And I'm certainly not the hardest-working member of the HVSC-crew.
A lot of work from a lot of people goes into fixing, ripping, compiling, checking, checking, checking and re-checking these updates, so please have patience.
Besides, there's still about four weeks left of January. :)
|
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
Quote: On the other hand, I heard that HVSC team has to perform a drastic HVSC directory change. Steppe, could you please mention a bit of this one, before update.exe would run on our peecees?
There are several disturbing factors in the current HVSC directory structure:
1. Inconsistencies to our own rule as to what is root and what is VARIOUS. There are composers in VARIOUS that, according to our rules should be in the root and vice versa.
2. With more and more composers surfacing and others getting their own directories by gathering their 3 tunes the directory trees grew to huge sizes (several screens high), which made navigating and maintaining a bit cumbersome.
3. The term VARIOUS and the fact that the tunes inside that directory were 3 directory levels further down than the glorious root composers was considered unfair by a lot of people. Discussions went in circles thinking about a better name (SCENE? POST_1993?) or to organize the root dir similiarly (CLASSICS? PRE_1993?), so we finally decided to go for the following structure:
/DEMOS
/0-9
/A-F
/G-L
/M-R
/S-Z
/UNKNOWN
/DOCUMENTS
/GAMES
/0-9
/A-F
/G-L
/M-R
/S-Z
/MUSICIANS
/0-9
/A
/B
/C
...
We don't say it's flawless now, but it's easier to maintain, easier to navigate, it's more fair (no more discussions about "why is composer x in the root, shouldn't he be in VARIOUS?" or "composer y made 3 gametunes before 93, shouldn't he be in the root?".
In addition, an almost flat structure like that hopefully encourages one or the other guy to program a proper frontend for HVSC one day. Be it in form of a tool or a website interface, so people can conveniently switch between several HVSC "views", assign "favourites" flags to tunes and composers etc. HVSC has grown almost too big to jump around in Windows Explorer without getting lost.
There was the argument that people new to HVSC usually quickly find what they're looking for (that is: Hubbard, Galway and Jeroen Tel). We think that people will still find what they're looking for, only it takes them an hour longer than before.
Give us some input what you think, even though it's a little late now. |
| |
Luca
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 178 |
Uhmmm, this means, e.g.: Composer-X did several tunes, for demos, games and standalone. Shall his tunes be spreaded in the respective folders? Did you mean "commercial games" for /GAMES folder, or "all" the games?
Anyway, congrats for keeping up the hard work, I appreciate it a lot, bet on it. |
| |
Yodelking
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 189 |
If a composer have 3+ tunes ALL his tune will be in his dir. Game composers who has 2 tunes or less will end up in the games dir.
So it will be a lot like today, just a merge of root and various, and then split the composers dirs into /A/, /B/, /C/, etc...
Hopefully all old farts who just listens to old music will find some new favourite composers moved from Various...
And all new farts might find something from the root... :)
Even though I'm one of the old farts (sigh!) I usually end up listening in Various anyway... Damn there's so much great music. |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
No, GAMES and DEMOS are (like in the current HVSC) still a place for tunes from unknown composers or, if composer is known, he only did one or two tunes. The "3 tunes minimum per directory" stays unchanged. |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
I like the new structure, but how do you recognise the "music groups?" like e.g. Vibrants.. not that I'm asking of cluttering the structure with exceptions.. I'm just curious. |
| |
Luca
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 178 |
Quote: I like the new structure, but how do you recognise the "music groups?" like e.g. Vibrants.. not that I'm asking of cluttering the structure with exceptions.. I'm just curious.
Heh, take Dane for example: splitting his sidography into "on his own" and "with Mitch" would be terrible, but exact and fair. Probably we'll have both folders, /M/Mitch_And_Dane and /D/Dane...
No music groups allowed, only cooperation works... |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Yeah, and how about our coop with Agemixer .. I want to have it in my directory too.. ;-))))) |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 - Next |
